From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753721AbbCITAR (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Mar 2015 15:00:17 -0400 Received: from mail-gw1-out.broadcom.com ([216.31.210.62]:47040 "EHLO mail-gw1-out.broadcom.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751230AbbCITAO (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Mar 2015 15:00:14 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.11,369,1422950400"; d="scan'208";a="59142407" Message-ID: <54FDEDBA.1070404@broadcom.com> Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2015 12:00:10 -0700 From: Ray Jui User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Bolle , Linus Walleij CC: Alexandre Courbot , Stephen Warren , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , "Grant Likely" , Christian Daudt , Matt Porter , Florian Fainelli , Russell King , Arnd Bergmann , "Scott Branden" , Dmitry Torokhov , "Anatol Pomazau" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , bcm-kernel-feedback-list , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/8] pinctrl: cygnus: add initial IOMUX driver support References: <1425515756-321-1-git-send-email-rjui@broadcom.com> <1425515756-321-4-git-send-email-rjui@broadcom.com> <1425542612.24292.180.camel@x220> <1425926456.2317.13.camel@tiscali.nl> In-Reply-To: <1425926456.2317.13.camel@tiscali.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 3/9/2015 11:40 AM, Paul Bolle wrote: > Linus Walleij schreef op ma 09-03-2015 om 17:28 [+0100]: >> I think you're right. Or I fear you're right. >> >> But this problem is present in so many drivers that a generic >> fixup needs to be done with a script and across an entire subsystem >> at once, > > Why don't we start with checking for similar cases during review, like > I'm now doing for only a week or two? > >> and besides I'm not sure of these macros disturb so much. > > I think they're confusing at best. Ie, when reading the code and the > corresponding Kconfig file one has to wonder: should the Kconfig symbol > actually be tristate or should it stay bool but did someone forget to > delete the module-specific code? > >> They are documentation in a sense, albeit a kind of documentation >> we used before we had git to record the actual authors of the >> code. > > They're useful, mostly, for module utilities. Outside that scope they > add information that thousands of files (that can also only be built-in > but do not have these macros) do not have and, apparently, do not need. I think it depends on how you see it. Based on this logic, then one can also argue comments in the code will be pre-processed away and are not needed. They at least serve the same documentation purpose in a way. So far I haven't seen other people complaining that having these module based macros in the driver are confusing when the Kconfig has a bool. Ray > > Thanks, > > > Paul Bolle >